Paul Grubbs 6-18 Improvement - Mansfield Park Book III
I’d like to use this writing opportunity to explore an idea I’m considering for my final paper, which also fits under the heading of improvement: self-immolation as a doorway to rejuvenation in the work of Romantic/Victorian female writers.
One motif that can be traced through several of the works we’ve considered is destruction of self as a creative and productive act. Several phoenix characters initiate their own destruction, on some level, with the hope that this act might bring about a freedom that is unavailable without these desperate measures. These individuals claim agency that has been denied them in shocking and sometimes fatal ways. These acts are a microcosm of the bottom-up reform female authors recognized would be required for any genuine re-imagining of the patriarchal, hierarchical system in which they lived and wrote. Perhaps the spectrum of acts also offers a doorway into each author’s perception of the feasibility of macro-level revolution:
a) In Frankenstein, Justine initiates her own destruction by confessing to a murder she did not commit, hoping that her act of self-destruction will bring about a preferable existence in heaven. Shelley’s self-immolation episode reflects an early-century instinct that genuine reform, on this earth, was likely impossible. Despite Elizabeth’s idealism, the reality is that Justine has no temporal options. Despite her parents’ eloquent tracts regarding equality, Shelley herself lived in a world that reflected few of those noble intentions.
b) In Corinne, Corrine participates in her own destruction by making a conscious decision to surrender to her affections for Oswald, despite her keen knowledge of their eventual disastrous effect. Here, however, the portrait is decidedly more hopeful because Corrine’s niece appears before her aunt has even disappeared. Stael allows that while the current generation may not set foot on Canaan, genuine potential exists for their descendants, who are better equipped to abandon the bigotry of the past and realize the potential of multiplicity and plentitude.
c) In Mansfield Park, after spending her entire life conforming to others’ expectations and allowing her will to be bent by those of higher social class and monetary wealth, Fanny takes a stand regarding Henry’s proposal of marriage. She “burns down the house” of her past identity, which earns the scorn of her adoptive family and finds her exiled to her place of birth, where she is forced to re-imagine her identity from square one. This allows Austen to have and eat her satirical cake – we’re allowed to smirk, to some degree, at her earl overemotional repression, but also genuinely cheer when she takes a stand of the heart and mind and refuses to commit to a future with Henry. Austen’s political/social reading then seems considerably more optimistic, as Fanny is not forced, like Corrine, to risk self-destruction without personally reaping the benefits of her sacrifice. In fact, her new self allows a fresh blossoming of her relationship with the formerly emotionally ignorant Edmund.
Returning to today’s reading for a minute, I think the Mansfield Park idea above (probably the superficially shakiest of the three in terms of Phoenix) can be supported by an early scene in Part III when Fanny verbally opposes Sir Thomas repeatedly regarding Henry’s proposal. Notice this comes immediately after Thomas says that while he understands her former hesitation and adherence to formality (regarding the fireplace) the time has now come to take a stand and enjoy generating the warmth she always deserved. Moments later Fanny sets a match to her former life of obedient servitude, giving Sir Thomas a blaze beyond his intentions that forces him, and many other family members, to reimagine the potential present in this young lady. I need to examine the rest of today's passage for additional evidence, but thought the placement of the conversation regarding the fireplace offered some provocative possibilities.
If anyone has feedback/challenges/other perspectives to explore to this proposed direction for a concluding paper I’d appreciate your response. There are additional examples (Hemans’s “The Bride of the Greek Isle,” the sterile sacrifice of the male creature that concludes Frankenstein, etc.) that I think could also be explored on this spectrum.
Paul Grubbs 6-18
Improvement - Mansfield Park Book III
I’d like to use this writing opportunity to explore an idea I’m considering for my final paper, which also fits under the heading of improvement: self-immolation as a doorway to rejuvenation in the work of Romantic/Victorian female writers.
One motif that can be traced through several of the works we’ve considered is destruction of self as a creative and productive act. Several phoenix characters initiate their own destruction, on some level, with the hope that this act might bring about a freedom that is unavailable without these desperate measures. These individuals claim agency that has been denied them in shocking and sometimes fatal ways. These acts are a microcosm of the bottom-up reform female authors recognized would be required for any genuine re-imagining of the patriarchal, hierarchical system in which they lived and wrote. Perhaps the spectrum of acts also offers a doorway into each author’s perception of the feasibility of macro-level revolution:
a) In Frankenstein, Justine initiates her own destruction by confessing to a murder she did not commit, hoping that her act of self-destruction will bring about a preferable existence in heaven. Shelley’s self-immolation episode reflects an early-century instinct that genuine reform, on this earth, was likely impossible. Despite Elizabeth’s idealism, the reality is that Justine has no temporal options. Despite her parents’ eloquent tracts regarding equality, Shelley herself lived in a world that reflected few of those noble intentions.
b) In Corinne, Corrine participates in her own destruction by making a conscious decision to surrender to her affections for Oswald, despite her keen knowledge of their eventual disastrous effect. Here, however, the portrait is decidedly more hopeful because Corrine’s niece appears before her aunt has even disappeared. Stael allows that while the current generation may not set foot on Canaan, genuine potential exists for their descendants, who are better equipped to abandon the bigotry of the past and realize the potential of multiplicity and plentitude.
c) In Mansfield Park, after spending her entire life conforming to others’ expectations and allowing her will to be bent by those of higher social class and monetary wealth, Fanny takes a stand regarding Henry’s proposal of marriage. She “burns down the house” of her past identity, which earns the scorn of her adoptive family and finds her exiled to her place of birth, where she is forced to re-imagine her identity from square one. This allows Austen to have and eat her satirical cake – we’re allowed to smirk, to some degree, at her earl overemotional repression, but also genuinely cheer when she takes a stand of the heart and mind and refuses to commit to a future with Henry. Austen’s political/social reading then seems considerably more optimistic, as Fanny is not forced, like Corrine, to risk self-destruction without personally reaping the benefits of her sacrifice. In fact, her new self allows a fresh blossoming of her relationship with the formerly emotionally ignorant Edmund.
Returning to today’s reading for a minute, I think the Mansfield Park idea above (probably the superficially shakiest of the three in terms of Phoenix) can be supported by an early scene in Part III when Fanny verbally opposes Sir Thomas repeatedly regarding Henry’s proposal. Notice this comes immediately after Thomas says that while he understands her former hesitation and adherence to formality (regarding the fireplace) the time has now come to take a stand and enjoy generating the warmth she always deserved. Moments later Fanny sets a match to her former life of obedient servitude, giving Sir Thomas a blaze beyond his intentions that forces him, and many other family members, to reimagine the potential present in this young lady. I need to examine the rest of today's passage for additional evidence, but thought the placement of the conversation regarding the fireplace offered some provocative possibilities.
If anyone has feedback/challenges/other perspectives to explore to this proposed direction for a concluding paper I’d appreciate your response. There are additional examples (Hemans’s “The Bride of the Greek Isle,” the sterile sacrifice of the male creature that concludes Frankenstein, etc.) that I think could also be explored on this spectrum.